ArticleActa radiologica open2024
Differential diagnosis between low-risk and high-risk thymoma: Comparison of diagnostic performance of radiologists with and without deep learning model.
Article in Acta radiologica open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distinct Associations ofGenes · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for diagnosis and prognosis of thymic epithelial tumors: a systematic review.Mediastinum (Hong Kong, China) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There are few CT-based deep learning (DL) studies on thymoma according to the World Health Organization classification. Purpose: To develop a CT-based DL model to distinguish between low-risk and high-risk thymoma and to compare the diagnostic performance of radiologists with and without the DL model. Material and Methods: 159 patients with 160 thymomas were included. A fine-tuning VGG16 network model with Adam optimizer was used, followed by k-fold cross validation. The dataset consisted of three axial slices, including the maximum tumor size from the CT volume data. The data were augmented 50 times by rotation, zoom, shear, and horizontal/vertical flip. Three independent networks for the CT dataset were considered, and the result was determined by voting. Three radiologists independently diagnosed thymomas with and without the model. The area under the curve (AUC) of the diagnostic performance was compared using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Results: Accuracy of the DL model was 71.3%. Diagnostic performance of the radiologists was as follows: AUC and accuracy without the DL model, 0.61-0.68 and 61.9%-69.3%; and with the DL model, 0.66-0.69 and 68.1%-70.0%, respectively. AUC of the diagnostic performance showed no significant differences between radiologists with and without the DL model. The DL model tended to increase the diagnostic accuracy, but AUC was not significantly improved. Conclusion: Diagnostic performance of the DL was comparable to that of radiologists. The DL model assistance tended to increase diagnostic accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.